14–18世纪立陶宛大公国的议会主义。

IF 0.1 Q4 LAW Przeglad Sejmowy Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.31268/ps.2021.74
A. Rachuba
{"title":"14–18世纪立陶宛大公国的议会主义。","authors":"A. Rachuba","doi":"10.31268/ps.2021.74","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article aims to present the beginnings and development of the forms of parliamentarism in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania when it was an independently functioning state and after its Union with the Crown of Poland, which gave rise to a new state in Europe called the Commonwealth. Lithuanian parliamentarism developed through a long process of evolution of representative institutions. The most important role was played by a group of magnates (the so-called lords and princes) holding the highest offices in the state and the Church, and appointed by the ruler. This group formed the Council of Lords, an advisory body to the grand dukes; during the Commonwealth ruler’s rare stays in Lithuania, the Council took over many of his prerogatives, becoming the most important legislative, executive, and judicial body of the state, except for the grand duke himself. The strong position of the Council of Lords (and in fact, a few of its most important members holding the most prominent offices) influenced for centuries the political life of Lithuania, dominated by powerful families, almost constantly playing the role of the so-called hegemons, even after they were formally equated in law with the common nobility in 1563. The Lithuanian nobility, on the other hand, was slowly gaining in the sixteenth century the right to participate in the parliamentary life of the state. In principle, however, Lithuanian nobles were deprived of the legislative and control initiative; their role was accepting and executing the ruler’s decisions agreed with the Council of Lords. Thus, they were interested in acquiring the rights of the Polish nobility, and consequently, in the Union with the Polish Crown. The establishment of the Commonwealth resulted in the incorporation of Lithuanian representatives from the senatorial group and poviat (county; Polish: powiat) nobility to the General Sejm of the Crown, in which, however, they could not play a significant role due to their small number compared to their Polish counterparts. In such a situation, it was important for the Lithuanians to maintain the principle of liberum veto, for in this way they could prevent the adoption of constitutions contrary to their interests. Throughout the whole history of the Commonwealth, the Lithuanians made efforts to ensure that their representation corresponded to the popular definition of the state of both nations (Polish and Lithuanian), and not one of its three equal provinces (Greater Poland, Little Poland, Lithuania). However, in the parliamentary system, their only success was the periodic separation of the constitutions for the Grand Duchy of Lithuania from those of the whole state. Even so, Lithuania was treated as one of three provinces, which was reflected in the election of a Lithuanian deputy as Sejm marshal every third Sejm, in the composition of Sejm commissions (1/3 of seats for Lithuanians), and finally in holding of every third Sejm in Lithuania (since 1676). While preparing the Lithuanian state for the union with Poland, King Zygmunt II Augustus carried through substantial political and legal reforms in 1564–66. He introduced a new administrative division, a uniform system of parliamentary institutions (district assemblies, bicameral Sejm), and a new code of civil criminal and administrative law (the so-called Second Lithuanian Statute in 1566). This system was much clearer, simpler, and better thought-out than the one in force in the Polish Crown. Each of the poviats of a province (i.e. voivodeship, some being single-poviat ones), was to meet for deliberations in a specific place (in fact, the capital town of this poviat), gathering local senators and the land owners (Latin: possessionati), and deliberate under the direction of the ‘lord’ of a given administrative unit, i.e. a bishop or voivode in poviats, and, from 1764 on, local marshals in non-voivodeship poviats, ex officio. The law stipulated who should attend a given sejmik under pain of penalties, how long a sejmik may be in session, how many deputies could be elected (only two in each poviat for ordinary Sejms), what remuneration each of them was to receive for their function. During parliamentary debates, Lithuanian senators and deputies often debated separately at the so-called provincial sessions (similar to the nobility from Greater and Little Poland) to prepare the constitutions for their own province and, possibly, take a common position on state issues. Since in Lithuanian law, only general sejms existed, for a long time Lithuanians did not recognise convocation and coronation Sejms as such, did not always participate in them, and did not agree to include them among the alternate ones (that is, for the marshal from Lithuania to head). Until the early eighteenth century, there were cases of calling by rulers or by the citizens of the Grand Duchy themselves of the so-called Lithuanian convocations, i.e. quasi-Sejm assemblies of Lithuanian estates, for deliberations to take decisions (mainly taxes) of a comprehensive nature. This process was initiated by Stefan Batory, but Lithuanians did not welcome the convocations as contrary to the provisions of the Union. The so-called general sejmik (held first at Vawkavysk [Wołkowysk] and then Slonim), where a common position was to be agreed on matters important for the entire state and Lithuania itself, soon came to an end. Lithuanian magnates were not interested in such a gathering, and the nobility (despite the occasional attempts to revive the institution) did not have the strength or the willingness to strive for its functioning. The function of the coordinator of common positions was then taken over by the provincial sessions mentioned above. In conclusion, it should be noted that before the union with Poland (Union of Lublin) in 1569, the Lithuanians had their own tradition and solutions of the parliamentary system, clearly different from those of the Crown. Their reforms of 1564–66 prepared the state to function within the Polish parliamentarism, but the 1569 Union did not establish a new Sejm of the Commonwealth – representatives of the Grand Duchy (senators and deputies) were only incorporated into the existing Sejm of the Crown. They functioned within it, but they certainly did not play an important role, most often dominated by the much more numerous, more politically sophisticated, and feeling their political strength deputies of the Crown. For a long time, the deputies from Lithuania were more at the disposal of their magnate patrons. Enjoying temporary successes and failures, they struggled to break free from their political tutelage (especially from the hegemons of the Radziwiłł, Chodkiewicz, Sapieha, Pac, and Czartoryski families) until the collapse of the state. The functioning of the Lithuanians within the parliamentary system (sejmiks, Sejm) shared with the Poles was also one of the most important factors of their linguistic and cultural Polonisation, clearly visible in the resolutions of sejmiks (they started to be written down in Polish) already at the end of the sixteenth century.","PeriodicalId":42093,"journal":{"name":"Przeglad Sejmowy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Parlamentaryzm Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego XIV–XVIII w.\",\"authors\":\"A. Rachuba\",\"doi\":\"10.31268/ps.2021.74\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article aims to present the beginnings and development of the forms of parliamentarism in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania when it was an independently functioning state and after its Union with the Crown of Poland, which gave rise to a new state in Europe called the Commonwealth. Lithuanian parliamentarism developed through a long process of evolution of representative institutions. The most important role was played by a group of magnates (the so-called lords and princes) holding the highest offices in the state and the Church, and appointed by the ruler. This group formed the Council of Lords, an advisory body to the grand dukes; during the Commonwealth ruler’s rare stays in Lithuania, the Council took over many of his prerogatives, becoming the most important legislative, executive, and judicial body of the state, except for the grand duke himself. The strong position of the Council of Lords (and in fact, a few of its most important members holding the most prominent offices) influenced for centuries the political life of Lithuania, dominated by powerful families, almost constantly playing the role of the so-called hegemons, even after they were formally equated in law with the common nobility in 1563. The Lithuanian nobility, on the other hand, was slowly gaining in the sixteenth century the right to participate in the parliamentary life of the state. In principle, however, Lithuanian nobles were deprived of the legislative and control initiative; their role was accepting and executing the ruler’s decisions agreed with the Council of Lords. Thus, they were interested in acquiring the rights of the Polish nobility, and consequently, in the Union with the Polish Crown. The establishment of the Commonwealth resulted in the incorporation of Lithuanian representatives from the senatorial group and poviat (county; Polish: powiat) nobility to the General Sejm of the Crown, in which, however, they could not play a significant role due to their small number compared to their Polish counterparts. In such a situation, it was important for the Lithuanians to maintain the principle of liberum veto, for in this way they could prevent the adoption of constitutions contrary to their interests. Throughout the whole history of the Commonwealth, the Lithuanians made efforts to ensure that their representation corresponded to the popular definition of the state of both nations (Polish and Lithuanian), and not one of its three equal provinces (Greater Poland, Little Poland, Lithuania). However, in the parliamentary system, their only success was the periodic separation of the constitutions for the Grand Duchy of Lithuania from those of the whole state. Even so, Lithuania was treated as one of three provinces, which was reflected in the election of a Lithuanian deputy as Sejm marshal every third Sejm, in the composition of Sejm commissions (1/3 of seats for Lithuanians), and finally in holding of every third Sejm in Lithuania (since 1676). While preparing the Lithuanian state for the union with Poland, King Zygmunt II Augustus carried through substantial political and legal reforms in 1564–66. He introduced a new administrative division, a uniform system of parliamentary institutions (district assemblies, bicameral Sejm), and a new code of civil criminal and administrative law (the so-called Second Lithuanian Statute in 1566). This system was much clearer, simpler, and better thought-out than the one in force in the Polish Crown. Each of the poviats of a province (i.e. voivodeship, some being single-poviat ones), was to meet for deliberations in a specific place (in fact, the capital town of this poviat), gathering local senators and the land owners (Latin: possessionati), and deliberate under the direction of the ‘lord’ of a given administrative unit, i.e. a bishop or voivode in poviats, and, from 1764 on, local marshals in non-voivodeship poviats, ex officio. The law stipulated who should attend a given sejmik under pain of penalties, how long a sejmik may be in session, how many deputies could be elected (only two in each poviat for ordinary Sejms), what remuneration each of them was to receive for their function. During parliamentary debates, Lithuanian senators and deputies often debated separately at the so-called provincial sessions (similar to the nobility from Greater and Little Poland) to prepare the constitutions for their own province and, possibly, take a common position on state issues. Since in Lithuanian law, only general sejms existed, for a long time Lithuanians did not recognise convocation and coronation Sejms as such, did not always participate in them, and did not agree to include them among the alternate ones (that is, for the marshal from Lithuania to head). Until the early eighteenth century, there were cases of calling by rulers or by the citizens of the Grand Duchy themselves of the so-called Lithuanian convocations, i.e. quasi-Sejm assemblies of Lithuanian estates, for deliberations to take decisions (mainly taxes) of a comprehensive nature. This process was initiated by Stefan Batory, but Lithuanians did not welcome the convocations as contrary to the provisions of the Union. The so-called general sejmik (held first at Vawkavysk [Wołkowysk] and then Slonim), where a common position was to be agreed on matters important for the entire state and Lithuania itself, soon came to an end. Lithuanian magnates were not interested in such a gathering, and the nobility (despite the occasional attempts to revive the institution) did not have the strength or the willingness to strive for its functioning. The function of the coordinator of common positions was then taken over by the provincial sessions mentioned above. In conclusion, it should be noted that before the union with Poland (Union of Lublin) in 1569, the Lithuanians had their own tradition and solutions of the parliamentary system, clearly different from those of the Crown. Their reforms of 1564–66 prepared the state to function within the Polish parliamentarism, but the 1569 Union did not establish a new Sejm of the Commonwealth – representatives of the Grand Duchy (senators and deputies) were only incorporated into the existing Sejm of the Crown. They functioned within it, but they certainly did not play an important role, most often dominated by the much more numerous, more politically sophisticated, and feeling their political strength deputies of the Crown. For a long time, the deputies from Lithuania were more at the disposal of their magnate patrons. Enjoying temporary successes and failures, they struggled to break free from their political tutelage (especially from the hegemons of the Radziwiłł, Chodkiewicz, Sapieha, Pac, and Czartoryski families) until the collapse of the state. The functioning of the Lithuanians within the parliamentary system (sejmiks, Sejm) shared with the Poles was also one of the most important factors of their linguistic and cultural Polonisation, clearly visible in the resolutions of sejmiks (they started to be written down in Polish) already at the end of the sixteenth century.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42093,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Przeglad Sejmowy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Przeglad Sejmowy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31268/ps.2021.74\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Przeglad Sejmowy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31268/ps.2021.74","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文旨在介绍立陶宛大公国议会制形式的起源和发展,当时立陶宛大公国是一个独立运作的国家,之后与波兰王国结盟,在欧洲产生了一个新的国家,称为英联邦。立陶宛议会制是通过代议制机构的长期演变过程发展起来的。最重要的角色是由一群巨头(所谓的领主和王子)扮演的,他们在国家和教会中担任最高职位,由统治者任命。这些人组成了上议院,这是大公们的咨询机构;在这位联邦统治者罕见地停留在立陶宛期间,议会接管了他的许多特权,成为除了大公本人之外最重要的立法、行政和司法机构。上议院的强势地位(事实上,其中一些最重要的成员担任着最重要的职位)影响了几个世纪以来立陶宛的政治生活,由强大的家族主导,几乎一直扮演着所谓的霸主的角色,即使在1563年他们在法律上正式等同于普通贵族。另一方面,立陶宛贵族在16世纪慢慢获得了参与国家议会生活的权利。然而,立陶宛贵族在原则上被剥夺了立法和控制的主动权;他们的职责是接受并执行与上议院一致的统治者的决定。因此,他们有兴趣获得波兰贵族的权利,并因此与波兰王室结盟。联邦的建立导致了来自参议院集团和波维亚特(县)的立陶宛代表的合并;波兰:贵族(powiat)到皇家瑟姆(General Sejm),然而,由于与波兰同行相比,他们的人数较少,因此无法发挥重要作用。在这种情况下,立陶宛人保持自由否决的原则是重要的,因为这样他们就可以防止通过违背他们利益的宪法。在整个联邦历史中,立陶宛人努力确保他们的代表权符合两个国家(波兰和立陶宛)的流行定义,而不是三个平等省份之一(大波兰,小波兰,立陶宛)。然而,在议会制中,他们唯一的成功是立陶宛大公国的宪法与整个国家的宪法的定期分离。即便如此,立陶宛仍被视为三个省之一,这反映在每三届瑟姆选举一名立陶宛代表为瑟姆主席,在瑟姆委员会的组成中(立陶宛人占三分之一的席位),最后在立陶宛举行每三届瑟姆(自1676年以来)。1564年至1566年,齐格蒙特二世奥古斯都(Zygmunt II Augustus)国王在准备立陶宛与波兰联合的同时,进行了实质性的政治和法律改革。他引入了新的行政区划、统一的议会制度(地区议会、两院制瑟姆)和新的民事、刑事和行政法法典(1566年所谓的《第二立陶宛法规》)。这个体系比波兰王室现行的体系更清晰、更简单、更周到。一个省的每个省(voivodeship,有些是单一省)都要在一个特定的地方(实际上是这个省的首都)开会讨论,聚集当地的参议员和土地所有者(拉丁语:财主),并在一个特定行政单位的“领主”的指导下进行讨论,即主教或voivode in poviats,从1764年开始,在非voivodeship poviats,当然是地方元帅。法律规定了谁应该参加某一特定的议会,否则将受到处罚,议会可以开会多长时间,可以选出多少名代表(普通议会每个选区只能选出两名代表),他们每个人的工作报酬是多少。在议会辩论期间,立陶宛的参议员和众议员经常在所谓的省会议上分别辩论(类似于大波兰和小波兰的贵族),为自己的省准备宪法,并可能在国家问题上采取共同立场。由于在立陶宛法律中,只有一般的议会存在,很长一段时间立陶宛人不承认召集和加冕的议会,并不总是参与其中,也不同意将它们列入候补会议(即由立陶宛元帅担任首脑)。直到18世纪早期,还存在统治者或大公国公民自己召集所谓立陶宛议会的情况,即。 本文旨在介绍立陶宛大公国议会制形式的起源和发展,当时立陶宛大公国是一个独立运作的国家,之后与波兰王国结盟,在欧洲产生了一个新的国家,称为英联邦。立陶宛议会制是通过代议制机构的长期演变过程发展起来的。最重要的角色是由一群巨头(所谓的领主和王子)扮演的,他们在国家和教会中担任最高职位,由统治者任命。这些人组成了上议院,这是大公们的咨询机构;在这位联邦统治者罕见地停留在立陶宛期间,议会接管了他的许多特权,成为除了大公本人之外最重要的立法、行政和司法机构。上议院的强势地位(事实上,其中一些最重要的成员担任着最重要的职位)影响了几个世纪以来立陶宛的政治生活,由强大的家族主导,几乎一直扮演着所谓的霸主的角色,即使在1563年他们在法律上正式等同于普通贵族。另一方面,立陶宛贵族在16世纪慢慢获得了参与国家议会生活的权利。然而,立陶宛贵族在原则上被剥夺了立法和控制的主动权;他们的职责是接受并执行与上议院一致的统治者的决定。因此,他们有兴趣获得波兰贵族的权利,并因此与波兰王室结盟。联邦的建立导致了来自参议院集团和波维亚特(县)的立陶宛代表的合并;波兰:贵族(powiat)到皇家瑟姆(General Sejm),然而,由于与波兰同行相比,他们的人数较少,因此无法发挥重要作用。在这种情况下,立陶宛人保持自由否决的原则是重要的,因为这样他们就可以防止通过违背他们利益的宪法。在整个联邦历史中,立陶宛人努力确保他们的代表权符合两个国家(波兰和立陶宛)的流行定义,而不是三个平等省份之一(大波兰,小波兰,立陶宛)。然而,在议会制中,他们唯一的成功是立陶宛大公国的宪法与整个国家的宪法的定期分离。即便如此,立陶宛仍被视为三个省之一,这反映在每三届瑟姆选举一名立陶宛代表为瑟姆主席,在瑟姆委员会的组成中(立陶宛人占三分之一的席位),最后在立陶宛举行每三届瑟姆(自1676年以来)。1564年至1566年,齐格蒙特二世奥古斯都(Zygmunt II Augustus)国王在准备立陶宛与波兰联合的同时,进行了实质性的政治和法律改革。他引入了新的行政区划、统一的议会制度(地区议会、两院制瑟姆)和新的民事、刑事和行政法法典(1566年所谓的《第二立陶宛法规》)。这个体系比波兰王室现行的体系更清晰、更简单、更周到。一个省的每个省(voivodeship,有些是单一省)都要在一个特定的地方(实际上是这个省的首都)开会讨论,聚集当地的参议员和土地所有者(拉丁语:财主),并在一个特定行政单位的“领主”的指导下进行讨论,即主教或voivode in poviats,从1764年开始,在非voivodeship poviats,当然是地方元帅。法律规定了谁应该参加某一特定的议会,否则将受到处罚,议会可以开会多长时间,可以选出多少名代表(普通议会每个选区只能选出两名代表),他们每个人的工作报酬是多少。在议会辩论期间,立陶宛的参议员和众议员经常在所谓的省会议上分别辩论(类似于大波兰和小波兰的贵族),为自己的省准备宪法,并可能在国家问题上采取共同立场。由于在立陶宛法律中,只有一般的议会存在,很长一段时间立陶宛人不承认召集和加冕的议会,并不总是参与其中,也不同意将它们列入候补会议(即由立陶宛元帅担任首脑)。直到18世纪早期,还存在统治者或大公国公民自己召集所谓立陶宛议会的情况,即。 立陶宛各阶层的准瑟姆(sejm)会议,审议并作出综合性质的决定(主要是税收)。这一进程是由斯特凡·巴托里发起的,但立陶宛人不欢迎这些会议,因为这违反了联盟的规定。所谓的议会大会(先是在沃卡维斯克[Wołkowysk],然后在斯洛尼姆举行),在会议上就整个国家和立陶宛本身的重要事项达成一致立场,但很快就结束了。立陶宛的权贵们对这样的集会不感兴趣,贵族们(尽管偶尔会尝试恢复这一制度)没有力量或意愿为其运作而努力。共同立场协调员的职能随后由上述各省会议接管。总之,应该指出的是,在1569年与波兰联合(卢布林联盟)之前,立陶宛人有自己的议会制度的传统和解决方案,与国王的议会制度明显不同。他们在1564年至1566年的改革使国家能够在波兰议会制度下运作,但1569年的联盟并没有建立一个新的联邦瑟姆——大公国的代表(参议员和众议员)只被纳入了现有的王室瑟姆。他们在其中发挥作用,但并没有发挥重要作用,通常是由人数更多,政治更成熟,政治实力更强的王室代表主导。在很长一段时间里,立陶宛的代表更多的是听命于他们的权贵赞助人。享受着暂时的成功和失败,他们努力摆脱自己的政治监护(尤其是Radziwiłł、乔基维茨、萨皮耶哈、帕克和恰尔托雷斯基家族的霸权),直到国家崩溃。立陶宛人在与波兰人共享的议会制度(sejmiks, Sejm)中的运作也是他们语言和文化波兰化的最重要因素之一,这在16世纪末的sejmiks决议(它们开始用波兰语写下来)中清晰可见。 立陶宛各阶层的准瑟姆(sejm)会议,审议并作出综合性质的决定(主要是税收)。这一进程是由斯特凡·巴托里发起的,但立陶宛人不欢迎这些会议,因为这违反了联盟的规定。所谓的议会大会(先是在沃卡维斯克[Wołkowysk],然后在斯洛尼姆举行),在会议上就整个国家和立陶宛本身的重要事项达成一致立场,但很快就结束了。立陶宛的权贵们对这样的集会不感兴趣,贵族们(尽管偶尔会尝试恢复这一制度)没有力量或意愿为其运作而努力。共同立场协调员的职能随后由上述各省会议接管。总之,应该指出的是,在1569年与波兰联合(卢布林联盟)之前,立陶宛人有自己的议会制度的传统和解决方案,与国王的议会制度明显不同。他们在1564年至1566年的改革使国家能够在波兰议会制度下运作,但1569年的联盟并没有建立一个新的联邦瑟姆——大公国的代表(参议员和众议员)只被纳入了现有的王室瑟姆。他们在其中发挥作用,但并没有发挥重要作用,通常是由人数更多,政治更成熟,政治实力更强的王室代表主导。在很长一段时间里,立陶宛的代表更多的是听命于他们的权贵赞助人。享受着暂时的成功和失败,他们努力摆脱自己的政治监护(尤其是Radziwiłł、乔基维茨、萨皮耶哈、帕克和恰尔托雷斯基家族的霸权),直到国家崩溃。立陶宛人在与波兰人共享的议会制度(sejmiks, Sejm)中的运作也是他们语言和文化波兰化的最重要因素之一,这在16世纪末的sejmiks决议(它们开始用波兰语写下来)中清晰可见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Parlamentaryzm Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego XIV–XVIII w.
This article aims to present the beginnings and development of the forms of parliamentarism in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania when it was an independently functioning state and after its Union with the Crown of Poland, which gave rise to a new state in Europe called the Commonwealth. Lithuanian parliamentarism developed through a long process of evolution of representative institutions. The most important role was played by a group of magnates (the so-called lords and princes) holding the highest offices in the state and the Church, and appointed by the ruler. This group formed the Council of Lords, an advisory body to the grand dukes; during the Commonwealth ruler’s rare stays in Lithuania, the Council took over many of his prerogatives, becoming the most important legislative, executive, and judicial body of the state, except for the grand duke himself. The strong position of the Council of Lords (and in fact, a few of its most important members holding the most prominent offices) influenced for centuries the political life of Lithuania, dominated by powerful families, almost constantly playing the role of the so-called hegemons, even after they were formally equated in law with the common nobility in 1563. The Lithuanian nobility, on the other hand, was slowly gaining in the sixteenth century the right to participate in the parliamentary life of the state. In principle, however, Lithuanian nobles were deprived of the legislative and control initiative; their role was accepting and executing the ruler’s decisions agreed with the Council of Lords. Thus, they were interested in acquiring the rights of the Polish nobility, and consequently, in the Union with the Polish Crown. The establishment of the Commonwealth resulted in the incorporation of Lithuanian representatives from the senatorial group and poviat (county; Polish: powiat) nobility to the General Sejm of the Crown, in which, however, they could not play a significant role due to their small number compared to their Polish counterparts. In such a situation, it was important for the Lithuanians to maintain the principle of liberum veto, for in this way they could prevent the adoption of constitutions contrary to their interests. Throughout the whole history of the Commonwealth, the Lithuanians made efforts to ensure that their representation corresponded to the popular definition of the state of both nations (Polish and Lithuanian), and not one of its three equal provinces (Greater Poland, Little Poland, Lithuania). However, in the parliamentary system, their only success was the periodic separation of the constitutions for the Grand Duchy of Lithuania from those of the whole state. Even so, Lithuania was treated as one of three provinces, which was reflected in the election of a Lithuanian deputy as Sejm marshal every third Sejm, in the composition of Sejm commissions (1/3 of seats for Lithuanians), and finally in holding of every third Sejm in Lithuania (since 1676). While preparing the Lithuanian state for the union with Poland, King Zygmunt II Augustus carried through substantial political and legal reforms in 1564–66. He introduced a new administrative division, a uniform system of parliamentary institutions (district assemblies, bicameral Sejm), and a new code of civil criminal and administrative law (the so-called Second Lithuanian Statute in 1566). This system was much clearer, simpler, and better thought-out than the one in force in the Polish Crown. Each of the poviats of a province (i.e. voivodeship, some being single-poviat ones), was to meet for deliberations in a specific place (in fact, the capital town of this poviat), gathering local senators and the land owners (Latin: possessionati), and deliberate under the direction of the ‘lord’ of a given administrative unit, i.e. a bishop or voivode in poviats, and, from 1764 on, local marshals in non-voivodeship poviats, ex officio. The law stipulated who should attend a given sejmik under pain of penalties, how long a sejmik may be in session, how many deputies could be elected (only two in each poviat for ordinary Sejms), what remuneration each of them was to receive for their function. During parliamentary debates, Lithuanian senators and deputies often debated separately at the so-called provincial sessions (similar to the nobility from Greater and Little Poland) to prepare the constitutions for their own province and, possibly, take a common position on state issues. Since in Lithuanian law, only general sejms existed, for a long time Lithuanians did not recognise convocation and coronation Sejms as such, did not always participate in them, and did not agree to include them among the alternate ones (that is, for the marshal from Lithuania to head). Until the early eighteenth century, there were cases of calling by rulers or by the citizens of the Grand Duchy themselves of the so-called Lithuanian convocations, i.e. quasi-Sejm assemblies of Lithuanian estates, for deliberations to take decisions (mainly taxes) of a comprehensive nature. This process was initiated by Stefan Batory, but Lithuanians did not welcome the convocations as contrary to the provisions of the Union. The so-called general sejmik (held first at Vawkavysk [Wołkowysk] and then Slonim), where a common position was to be agreed on matters important for the entire state and Lithuania itself, soon came to an end. Lithuanian magnates were not interested in such a gathering, and the nobility (despite the occasional attempts to revive the institution) did not have the strength or the willingness to strive for its functioning. The function of the coordinator of common positions was then taken over by the provincial sessions mentioned above. In conclusion, it should be noted that before the union with Poland (Union of Lublin) in 1569, the Lithuanians had their own tradition and solutions of the parliamentary system, clearly different from those of the Crown. Their reforms of 1564–66 prepared the state to function within the Polish parliamentarism, but the 1569 Union did not establish a new Sejm of the Commonwealth – representatives of the Grand Duchy (senators and deputies) were only incorporated into the existing Sejm of the Crown. They functioned within it, but they certainly did not play an important role, most often dominated by the much more numerous, more politically sophisticated, and feeling their political strength deputies of the Crown. For a long time, the deputies from Lithuania were more at the disposal of their magnate patrons. Enjoying temporary successes and failures, they struggled to break free from their political tutelage (especially from the hegemons of the Radziwiłł, Chodkiewicz, Sapieha, Pac, and Czartoryski families) until the collapse of the state. The functioning of the Lithuanians within the parliamentary system (sejmiks, Sejm) shared with the Poles was also one of the most important factors of their linguistic and cultural Polonisation, clearly visible in the resolutions of sejmiks (they started to be written down in Polish) already at the end of the sixteenth century.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
39
期刊最新文献
Nowa Zelandia: Wyrok Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 21 listopada 2022 r. w sprawie Make It 16 Incorporated vs. Attorney-General (dotyczący wieku uprawniającego do głosowania w wyborach), sygn. akt SC 14/2022 Dopuszczalność odwołania od uchwał Krajowej Rady Sądownictwa w sprawach przeniesienia sędziego do innego wydziału Posłanka Wanda Ładzina (1880–1966) i jej działalność w Polsce i we Francji Uczestnictwo Sejmu i Senatu w procedurze kontroli przestrzegania zasady subsydiarności a przyszłość parlamentów narodowych w procesach decyzyjnych Unii Europejskiej Uzasadnienie orzeczeń sądowych – wybrane problemy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1